DEPARTMENT O THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION DF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC [20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 00449-08
5 September 2008
Dear Qs...
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board f © Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive sessi n, considered your
application on 3 September 2008. yY ur allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordan¢e with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record, and applicable Statutes, regulations,
and policies.
record, the Board found the evidenc submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
After careful and conscientious ence submites of the entire
You enlisted in the Navy in September 1987 and served without
disciplinary incident until August 1989, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUJP) for ill gal drug usage. You
received a page 13 and were allowed to be retained in service,
pending any further misconduct. How ver, in February 1990, you
received another NUP for drug usage.
On 1 March 1990, you were recommended for separation due to drug
abuse with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge. You waived
your right to counsel and your right|to an administrative
separation board.
On 12 March 1990, the separation authority approved these
recommendations and directed an OTH discharge with an RE-4
reenlistment code and on 15 March 1990, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and the passage of time.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your misconduct. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your client’s case are
such that favorable action cannot be taken. Your client is
entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon
submission of new and material evidence or other matter not
previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is
important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity
attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying
for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on
the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFBIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00447-08
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 21 December 1988, you were recommended for separation due to drug abuse with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice, Sincerely,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00939-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00256-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03137-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02899-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2008. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09536-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11077-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 29 January 1982, CMC did not approve the general discharge and authorized an OTH discharge, based on your repeated offenses for drug usage, and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03777-11
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 7 December 1989, the ADB voted to separate you due to your drug abuse with an OTH discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00616-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02781-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2008. The separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an OTH discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code, and on 8 October 1981, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.